Thoughts on Chariots

[Remwr]

After watching the recent Cleopatra trailer and seeing the inclusion of chariots, I just wanted to know what everyone else's opinions, thoughts, and ideas are on this. I've read in some places that chariots mostly went out of use after the Battle of Gaugamela in the time of Alexander. While not that concerned with historical accuracy, I just wondered if anyone knew if chariots were used in the near east after the campaigns of Alexander and his generals.

[Miszel]

Scythed chariots were used by Seleucids and Pontus agains Romans,and as far as i remember they proved to be uneffective.

Egyptian ones served mostly as platform for archers. Horse archers of steppe people and generaly cavalry(beause chariots were used to break lines too) proved to be more flexible and faster, thus egyptian style of chariot usage went out of fashion.

[Mamertine]

Post-Alexander chariots were reserved to ceremonial purposes only, for the most part. I have not gone through the details of every battle in history, but the Greeks knew they were useless and used to make lanes for the chariots to go down in their infantry ranks that narrowed, stopping the horses. Then they killed the charioteers. The Romans as well knew they were useless and wrote that with chariots you needed flat ground and all horses needed to reach the enemy without injury or death. If you wounded one horse it makes everything come to a crashing halt, literally. For gameplay purposes they will be in the game, though. Some were used for troop transportation and the like in battles. These were used a lot. I hope they are in the game.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caltrop

[IGdood]

From EB 2:

Merkabim Garamantim
(Garamantine Chariots)

_____________________________________

The Garamantine nobles and chieftains ride in large chariots across the desert from which they throw spears and javelins at their enemies. These men are the most wealthy and highest ranking among the tribes of the Garamantes and thus wear more elaborate clothing, such as pants. They also carry Berber swords, though these are difficult to wield from the back of a moving chariot. Beware of the zealous nature of these men as they will try to engage the enemy, even in close quarters, for they are used to hunting down the cowardly Troglodytai Ethiopians of the Sahara, and not accustomed to facing disciplined soldiers. Use them with care and they will ride down your foes for you!

History: The chariots used by the Garamantes are described in Herodotus as being four horsed. While this style did exist in North Africa, the Carthaginians using four horse chariots for example, it was somewhat impractical. The rock art of the Garamantines depicts their chariots as being driven by two horses, which seems a more realistic number. As Herodotus is known for his embellishment, the archaeological evidence was favoured.

The Garamantines were a group of Berber tribes living in North central Africa on the fringe of the Sahara desert that herded cattle and irrigated farmland. They conducted raids against towns to the North and against the nomadic Saharan people known to the Greeks as the Troglodytai. The Garamantines reached dominance in the second and third century AD and are often referred to as one of the first great Berber nations. They fought on foot, from horseback and from chariots. Much of the evidence for their equipment comes from their own rock art and Egyptian paintings of Libyan soldiers. According to their own later rock art, the Garamantes changed little in appearance from those Libyan tribes which raided dynastic Egypt long before the Greeks and Romans were major world powers.

Herodotos refers to the Garamantes as a fierce and aggressive tribe that would hunt down the Troglodytai but also says that they are a people who know little of war. Herodotos made the Garamantines famous for his fanciful tale of the cattle they raised which supposedly had horns so long they had to graze backwards. The last Roman triumph celebrated by a general not related to the Imperator, or the Imperator himself, was against the Garamantes in the first century BC by Lucius Cornelius Balbus.

[panzerschreck]

At least if there are chariots ingame it will allow to have them for mods that take place some centuries before or to represent the persian chariots at the battle of Gaugameles versus Alexander the Great.

[GoTW Kubee]

I think there'll be 3 main types of chariots.

-Heavy chariots (e.g. scythed chariots) which will probably be similar to Rome I chariots in that they'll be very effective at countering heavy cavalry but vulnerable to infantry, especially pikes. I don't know whether or not they'll still go amok from a few volleys of flaming arrows but, if not, they'll probably make them easier to kill with missiles.

-Chariot archers (like the one seen in that trailer), will probably be similar to the ones in Rome I, though they may or may not bring back the cantabrian circle ability for them due to 'historical accuracy' or wtv.

-Transport/light chariots, basically chariots which will be able to ferry infantry reasonably quickly to where you want to deploy them (I think there was sth about this on the wiki page for the Iceni).

[DochtorGajo]

They were used at the battle of Magnesia for example by Antigonos III and eventually were hurled at their own cavalry, causing whole of that flank to collapse. Otherwise, it seems, that whey were generally often disabled by missiles, or just passed through lanes in infantry harmlessly as far as general theory goes. They were also in theory much more expensive and less mobile than horsemen, so they were already substituted in role of mobile arm with something better in almost all ways. Few things to note:

1. As for their use against infantry, there are not many examples of their usage in charge and where they appear, it seems they were used with primary intention to intimidate with frontal charge, not being used too creatively.

2. Infantry opening lanes seems like rather unimportant things made into some supermaneuver against anything big and clumsy. I dont see how this could work so perfectly as it supposedly did against several lines of chariots, or elephants, if these were arrayed in several small lines and interspersed in checkerboard pattern one behin the other, or at least changed angle of their approach at some point (I havent seen neither being done with either elephants, or chariots in accounts), so it rather seems like surprize maneuver against uninventive enemy attacking with vehicles in single line, or absolutely unimportant, if charioteers are reluctant to actually plow into enemy formation, or disabled largely by skirmisher screen in first place.

So all in all, regarging chariots as close combat vehicles, like at Gaugamela, or Magnesia, they were used frontally against enemy hugely outnumbering them and most would be disabled by missiles before they ever reached the enemy. So there is absolutely no reason, why they couldnt be in game as one option and be effective, of not used in the way they failed in history, but rather on flanks and carefully. I also see absolutely no reason, why they should be extremely effective anti cavalry weapon, though there already are and most propably will be nonsence anti-cavalry spear bonuses and similar things instead of spear troops being frontally strong overall against any enemy etc. (Still would be good if these troops received ability to rout at sight, or reduce charge bonus to 0, rather than have attack bonus, like in S2TW, where yari samurai had like six times bigger attack against cavalry, than against infantry, which is ridiculous)

[GoTW Kubee]

I also see absolutely no reason, why they should be extremely effective anti cavalry weapon

Because otherwise the gameplay would suck... If chariots aren't effective vs. cav, then cata factions will just dominate (except for in sieges and bridge battles ofc), considering that Parthia and Armenia will probably have very good missiles. All you'll need to do to win is kill off the enemy cav with your own, stronger cav then surround and shoot your opponent to death with your superior missiles, considering he won't be able to force you to engage his inf as he has no cav left. It might not be completely historically accurate but it is necessary to ensure good gameplay.

[Augustus Scipius]

Well, the one we see is a scythed chariot. Look at its wheels. Scythed chariots were used in this period as well.

[Prince Regent George]

Ptolemaic chariots were mentioned only once by Appian, while he was describing a battle which occured 300 hundred ages before him!
Furthermore, the fact that he claims that the Egyptians had a 350.000 men army, with an other 300.000 as reserves, undermines effectively his unreliable comments.
Finally, Polybius' account for the above mentioned battle, only 40 years after, contains many more details (visit my latest post), while he doesn't refer to chariots at all.

Anyway, even if the Egyptians had chariots (highly unlikely), they wouldn't be the depicted ones (Ramesete style of 1200 AD), but the scythed ones:


The reason is that:
1) These chariots were the only ones used in Middle East during this age.
2) The last mention of Ramesete chariots was 1000 years before the game starts.
3) They were handled by Egyptians, who, under the Ptolemaic regime, were a minor portion of their army.
4) No scythed chariots were obsolete, because of the cavalry, which was much more flexible and lethal.
5) The Ramesete scythed chariot never existed.

There is nothing more to be said.

[Dan113112]

Ptolemaic chariots were mentioned only once by Appian, while he was describing a battle which occured 300 hundred ages before him!
Furthermore, the fact that he claims that the Egyptians had a 350.000 men army, with an other 300.000 as reserves, undermines effectively his unreliable comments.
Finally, Polybius' account for the above mentioned battle, only 40 years after, contains many more details (visit my latest post), while he doesn't refer to chariots at all.

Anyway, even if the Egyptians had chariots (highly unlikely), they wouldn't be the depicted ones (Ramesete style of 1200 AD), but the scythed ones:


The reason is that:
1) These chariots were the only ones used in Middle East during this age.
2) The last mention of Ramesete chariots was 1000 years before the game starts.
3) They were handled by Egyptians, who, under the Ptolemaic regime, were a minor portion of their army.
4) No scythed chariots were obsolete, because of the cavalry, which was much more flexible and lethal.
5) The Ramesete scythed chariot never existed.

There is nothing more to be said.

There wouldn't be that many Macedonians in the army but what about native phalanx troops? How is 200, 000 soldiers impossible? The Romans managed it at Phillipi. The Roman logistical system wasn't the only effective one. Phillip and Alexander's army had a highly effective supply train. The numbers aren't impossible but the logistics would be difficult. Again, not impossible but highly unlikely.

Your picture is not an Egyptian chariot, though. That's one from Persia or Anatolia I believe. Is there any proof that Egypt used that kind of chariot?

[Prince Regent George]

There wouldn't be that many Macedonians in the army but what about native phalanx troops?

As I said the native Egyptians were always a neglectable pourcentage of the Ptolemaic army.

How is 200, 000 soldiers impossible? The Romans managed it at Phillipi. The Roman logistical system wasn't the only effective one. Phillip and Alexander's army had a highly effective supply train. The numbers aren't impossible but the logistics would be difficult. Again, not impossible but highly unlikely.

Firstly, the calculation of the roman numbers you mention in the battle of Philippi is based on the analogy between legions and auxiliary troops, and, therefore, it's quite arbitrary. Personally, I doubt thse excessive estimations due to logistic limitations.

However, in the case of Raphia, the fragility of Appius' numbers is also proved, apart from the supply difficulties (during the Antiquity statistiques prove that Egypt could mobilize a 80.000 men army, maximum), by the recruitment limitations. The recruitment of 650.000 men, who are the vast majority of the male population of Egypt, capable to take arms, would destroy Egypt's financial structure, making the military campaign impossible.
So, there is no doubt that Appian's account is ridiculous. In contrary, Polybious is a rather credible source, whose very detailing description greatly enforces his reliability.

Your picture is not an Egyptian chariot, though. That's one from Persia or Anatolia I believe. Is there any proof that Egypt used that kind of chariot?

You misunerstood my post. I clearly sate that this a depiction of a scythed chariot used by the Seleucids, so I concluded that if Egypt ever used chariots in battle (which I doubt it), it would have seemed like that in the picture, being given that the scythed ones were the only type of chariot used by the hellenistic powers.

[Sun Jetzu]

I'm just wondering how they will react in terrain.

[RGA]

I have no issue whatsoever with Egypt having chariots in their arsenal. After Gaugamela, chariots were considered ineffective as a shock weapon, but they were far from useless. In a society with little equestrian background as Egypt, it is plausible that some local noblemen saw in chariots a safer and much more comfortable platform than a horse kicking around.

But I really hope that the myth "chariots beat cavalry" will never come back. RTW is the source of misconception that scythed chariots will eat any cavalry for breakfast. No, of course not. The worst horseman in the world could still easily outmaneuver the best charioteer. What stops the horseman from maneuvering around the scythe blade and strike from behind? Not to mention that chariots were impossible to operate in close order, unlike cavalry.

[Markas]

Given that the chariot in the Cleopatra trailer coincides with her comment about her brother, it is not unreasonable to assume it is a general unit (if indeed it is even going to be in the full game).

[[N2]Kami]

On the side note, I think spear bonus is reasonable ( and yari samurai I think their bonus is around 20? and normal attack is around 7-8?), heavy cavalry with high charge bonus still crush a spearman unit in a frontier assault. And spear is a defensive weapon, unlike sword is offensive so spear can't do much against infantry if they get close enough, where sword is the dominant weapon.
And the chariot thing, I think chariots only serve as a transport or for mounted archer instead going in the front line like in the previous era, which saw unprofessional armies.

[achilles-91]

i really hope those chariots we seen in video arent 'scythed chariots' from wiki description. i hope egypt have those and scythed, because if those are scythed..man.. it's ridiculous

[Dude with the Food]

Celts designed special axis(es?) for chariots that were useful on the rough terrain of Western Europe. Although by the time of the game, they were mainly used as transport for nobles and platforms to throw missiles from before they dismounted to fight.

[Inhuman One]

Well with the current engine they can have troops dismount from chariots just like horsemen. Only with the chariots more people could stand on it. Might be neat to have for ranged troops. Use the chariots to attack on the move, and dismount for greater range and accuracy, as well as being able to get on walls and such.

[Doe3000]

Well with the current engine they can have troops dismount from chariots just like horsemen. Only with the chariots more people could stand on it. Might be neat to have for ranged troops. Use the chariots to attack on the move, and dismount for greater range and accuracy, as well as being able to get on walls and such.

You make an important point. The Chariots in Rome II are not restricted to two roles as they were in Rome I. Because of the engine limitations of 2004, Chariots in the original Rome could only be used in two ways -1. to charge the enemy formations (scythed chariots), and 2. to pepper the enemy with arrows from a distance (chariots archers). If the faction description for the Iceni are anything to go by then chariots will serve a new purpose they didn't have in the original Rome. They will be battle taxis to transport elite infantry quickly to hot spots on the battlefield and will therefore be similar to 18th century Dragoons. These chariots will still be able to pepper their enemies with javelins or arrows, and they might still be able to charge enemy formations in the rear, but they will be able to perform other functions too.